Talk:John Beddington

Fukushima incident

Hi. I work In Sir John Beddington's Government Office for Science, and a concern was raised about the accuracy of how the reporting of the Fukushima incident is portrayed on the page.

The 'controversy' section on John Beddington's entry on Wikipedia is misrepresentative. The Independent article that much of the section quotes (ref 16) is fundamentally inaccurate, so whilst the wiki quotes the Independent article accurately it is quoting flawed information. The key statement is that Beddington's advice "resulted in a significant delay in evacuating British citizens from Japan." This is wrong. The advice of the Science Advisory Group in Emergencies (SAGE), which Beddington Chairs, throughout was that there was no need for British citizens to evacuate Tokyo. Consequently there was no recommendation from the Foreign & Commonwealth Office (FCO) to do so.

The minutes from the SAGE meetings and the FCO's advice corroborate this. http://www.bis.gov.uk/go-science/science-in-government/global-issues/civil-contingencies http://ukinjapan.fco.gov.uk/en/news/?view=News&id=566406782

Furthermore, and following from this falsehood, the section in its entirety paints a wholly negative picture of the GCSA's response to the crisis when the reverse is true, as evidenced by the following:

- In the BBC Radio 4 programme Material World on 24 November 2011, Sir John Beddington’s response in communicating the risks during the Fukushima crisis was described by Lord Krebs, Chair of the House of Lords Science & Technology Committee as “exemplary” http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b006qyyb

- Michael Hanlon, then science editor of the Daily Mail, also had praise for Beddington’s response, saying he couldn’t have explained it more clearly. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1367289/Japan-earthquake-tsunami-Are-right-worry-nuclear-angle.html

Overall, it’s unfair for someone to have written this about John without our right of reply. I'd be very grateful for any advice at all about how we go about rectifying this in a transparent manner.

Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Happydan.uk (talk • contribs) 14:32, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

I've removed the paragraph in question, quoted below, while this is resolved. But please note that you are enjoying the right of reply, and assume good faith.

Press reporting of the Fukushima crisis was extensive and sometimes based on scant factual information. The critical moment came around 16–17 March when it became apparent that the situation at Fukushima was more serious than previously anticipated. Beddington was accused of "misinforming" the British Government over the Fukushima I nuclear accidents. The Whitehall Correspondent of the Independent reported that he initially underestimated the seriousness of the incident by "unequivocally" saying there was no danger from radiation, but 24 hours later said he was "extremely worried". This resulted in "significant delay" in evacuating British citizens from Japan, according to a British minister.. Other commentators also reported on the position taken by Beddington and the change in the science advice that took place around 16–17 March, commenting that although the situation was "definitely more serious" the "Japanese are doing the right things". .

Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:21, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

The only problem that I see with this now is that this episode (of "Fukushima nuclear incident advice") is now under the heading "Controversy" without an explanation of why it is controversial and without a citation. Perhaps the sentence would be better off as a sub-sub section under the sub-heading of "Chief Scientific Officer"? Zangar (talk) 17:26, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on John Beddington. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.habs-monmouth.org/en/Monmouth%20School%20Alumni
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110517075446/http://www3.imperial.ac.uk/people/j.beddington/honoursandawards to http://www3.imperial.ac.uk/people/j.beddington/honoursandawards

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:54, 12 January 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on John Beddington. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.habs-monmouth.org/en/Monmouth%20School%20Alumni
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110611191116/http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Nl1/Newsroom/DG_188114 to http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Nl1/Newsroom/DG_188114

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:14, 24 April 2017 (UTC)